Field Service Management (FSM) & Planning and Scheduling Optimization (PSO)

Add as many details as possible, by providing details you’ll make it easier for others to reply

We defined a Calendar for Service techs based on Work Day Type from 8 to 12 and from 13 to 17. In case a service technician on an Assignment “Start Work” out of those period of time is there a constraint or not? I ask the question because back in time I experienced a constraint not to be able to “Start Work”

Our Client has a requirement that they would like the orders to be allocated by PSO before the shift start and afterwards PSO should not allocate any other order for the current Day. They have a process for handling emergency orders manually during the Day. We have used Time Before Shift Start to 2 hours so that the orders start getting committed 2 hours before shift start and Max commited activities to 50(Due to activity durations this is the max possible orders that the tech can work on)However in scenarios where there is not enough work at the start of the shift,PSO ends up committing new orders to tech when any new orders come to the system.Do we have any way to stop this so that no new order are commited. Any help would be highly appreciated    

Hello everyone,I would like to better understand how Read Type and Read Type Validation work in IFS FSM, specifically in the context of the Meter Readings table.However, I still have some questions:What is the exact role of Read Type within the Meter Readings table? How does Read Type Validation work when validating these readings? What kind of rules are typically applied? Are these validations configurable? If so, where are they defined? Are there any best practices for using these concepts in meter reading scenarios?If anyone can share practical examples or official documentation, it would be greatly appreciated.

Hi, How can i remove the scheduling exception showing below.. May i know the settings.  Regards,Shiyaz

Request Bundle tasks not posible to set *Multiple Visit Allow* Is this functionality not supported for bundle task. Customer has problem with planning these task using PSO. ​@Björn Kleist ​@André 

Hi ,I have created a custom attribute on the Resource entity (e.g., a boolean flag to identify specific resources).Now, I need to filter the Resource ID LOV in the Service Object screen so that it only displays resources where this custom attribute is set to TRUE.This is the LOV where i need to filter based on my custom attribute  Is there any way to modify or extend the LOV to include this custom attribute in the filter?Has anyone implemented a similar requirement?Any guidance would be appreciated.Thanks in advance!

Hello Community,I am working with Work Order Requests in IFS Maintenance where a single Request contains multiple tasks.Currently, when the Request is released, all tasks under that Request are automatically released as well. However, from a business perspective, we would like to release the Request without releasing all associated tasks, so that tasks can be released individually at a later stage based on priority or readiness.I would like to understand:Is there any standard IFS functionality or configuration available that allows releasing individual tasks under a Request? Is this behavior by design due to the hierarchical status control between Requests and Tasks? If individual task release is not supported in standard IFS, are there any recommended functional workarounds or best‑practice approaches (for example, separating Requests, alternative object structures, or planning controls)?We are looking to stay within standard IFS functionality and avoid heavy customizations wherever p

I have created an archived table named A_XXX. The archiving process is happening through an integration schedule. Now, the data in this archived table needs to be flushed after one week. How can this be implemented?

I have created a scheduled job that is supposed to run every day to archive the ROAD_DISTANCES table. Earlier, the job was running automatically as expected and During testing, I was also able to manually run the job without any issues. However, after some time, the job still shows as running (both automatically and when clicking Run Now), but the archiving does not occur.   When I use the Archiving Engine, the ROAD_DISTANCES table is archived successfully.   it seems the scheduled job is behaving differently. Does anyone have an idea why this might be happening?

Are skill unavailabiltiies an option? Either now or in the future. Currently we only have the option for skill availabilities (inclusive range) We would like to have the option exclude a period of time from a skill (unavailability)Also, can the maximum duration of a skill availability be increased further than 99 days? I would need to utilize a skill availability to 6 months or more (seasonal demand etc) 

One of the integration we have with our FSM Mobile app require to send the email address as lower case string. Is there a way to do that using Client Scripting, Business Rules or Custom Metadata in FSM 6U4? Alternative, we are considering to do this via SQL scripting (a sql job that runs daily and convert the email addresses that has any Upper case character into full lower case email address. Thanks in advance. Daniel. 

Hi everyone,After upgrading from Apps 10 to IFS Cloud, we are facing an issue with Location Category on existing (migrated) locations.In Apps 10, there was no Location Category field. After the upgrade, all existing locations are now available in IFS Cloud, but this field is empty for those records.As shown in Figure 1, the Location Category is blank for existing locations, and we are unable to update it — not via the UI and also not through any backend method.Figure 1At the same time, when creating a new location (see Figure 2), the Location Category field is mandatory.Figure 2 Is there any supported way to update or populate the Location Category for existing/migrated locations?If this is not possible:We would need to create new location records Existing records cannot be easily cleaned up This could lead to duplicate data and unnecessary clutter in the systemThanks in advance for your help!

A. What is your idea?1) ClassificationChoose ONE: keep the applicable option and delete the rest.Opportunity for improvement2) Brief descriptionWhat happened, what is missing, or what could be better? Focus on the problem or opportunity (not the solution).Write here:The amount of information visible in the Dispatch Console is limited by the amount of rows each ticket can have (I think it is 2 or 3 at the moment).It would be good to have information such as Request /RWT number, Customer number, customer name, Location/Address, Country, Project number visible in the ticket without the need to click on the ticket or hover over it. Most of our Tickets span multiple days, so this would drastically increase the useability of the Dispatch Console for us.B. Context and scope1) Who is affected?Choose ONE or MORE: keep the applicable options and delete the rest.Internal users2) FrequencyChoose ONE: keep the applicable option and delete the rest.DailyC. Value and impact1) What is the business out

Hi Team,Is there any out-of-the-box (OOTB) option in IFS Cloud to enable or display the Sign-Off Requirement tab in the Prepare Work Order screen?Our requirement is to have sign-off details available during the work order preparation stage, but currently, we are not able to find a standard option to achieve this.

I have created a request with status New after providing all required information. Under this request, I have created a connected task (Task ID: 351) with all mandatory details. Is there any standard functionality in IFS Service Management that allows me to release the task independently, while keeping the request in new status.In other words, can a task be released without releasing the parent request?

Hi,In the ESM solution, when setting up a PM Action, we can default a resource for the work list.  Is this possible in the Request based service management solution? As I can only find a field to add the Resource Group to the standard tasks. But would like to default the resource to the specified object ID as how it is for a PM action.  If not, is this part of the road map? Thanks! 

Hi All,Please let us know what the meaning of Invalid Task Group, we are getting this multiple services 

Hi,I've created a new service contract.It seems that I cannot set Plan Start Date (Invoicing) later than Valid From on the Service Contract Header. Why is this.For example the Contract Valid From date is 2026-04-01, but we have agreed with the customer that we will start invoicing from 2026-05-01.IFS doesn´t allow us to use service contract this way, why is this? How is it suppose to work? Is this somthing we can change?  

Hi,We have technicians that may assist in different locations and use stock from those locations.In FSM we have set up processes to use dates on the Person Place table to show when they are in a different location.The example below shows his standard place would be TN, but on the dates shown he is working from G and using their stock.FSM drives this, and we thought that FSM Mobile would then update if the technician was to perform an INIT on the morning they goes to a different place.What we have noticed is that on INIT, the Sync Rule obtains the correct data, but that’s pretty irrelevant as it appears the process for stock usage is taken from:var location = getUserInfo('StockFromLocation');var place = getUserInfo('StockFromPlace'); It appears this data is then held somewhere as the INIT file is pulling through the data we have captured below. If we check the database, the database shows Place for Stock being TN as per the sync rule. However it’s simply pulling through the first place

Hi IFS Community,with the 25R1 release, the Selection Rules functionality was extended (e.g. rule types and weighting), which is a very welcome improvement. However, the current solution leaves some gaps and we are unclear if these are supposed to be filled in future releases.Our Use Case We use Selection Rules to distribute Service Requests into the correct delivery units. For our setup, Region and Model criteria are essential. The Service criteria, however, is largely irrelevant, as the organizational structure is the same for most services.Current LimitationAt the moment, the Service criteria is mandatory, which forces us to duplicate the entire Selection Rule set for each service (≈ 50 services) leading to a huge data volume in the table and the maintenance effort coming with it.Observation in the UI / Page DesignerIn both the UI and the Page Designer, it appears that:Criteria might be configurable as mandatory vs. optional Criteria might support individual weightingThese settings

When attempting to change the status of a work task from Work Started to Work Done, we receive the error message below - divisor is equal to zero.In reviewing the work task, the work order, the PM Action, the measurements for object, no issue can be found. Any insight/thoughts would be helpful!  

Hi all,I’m working with a Work Order that includes two Work Tasks: one handled by an external resource and one by an internal technician. These tasks are linked by a dependency and must be executed together.The external Work Task is assigned via the B2B Portal by the subcontractor, and the internal dispatcher must validate/confirm the proposed date before planning the internal task.The issue is that, in the B2B Portal, the dependency is not shown—even though the dependency is correctly defined and visible in IFS Cloud. I can see the “Dependency” section in the B2B Work Task screen, but no data is displayed.Has anyone experienced this? Is there a configuration or limitation in the B2B Portal that prevents dependencies from being displayed?IFS Cloud Dependencies 

When creating a Customer Location I have the option to assign a Validity period against the location with a start date and end date:There doesn’t appear to be any enforcement of this parameter when I am creating a Service Request/Task at the customer location if the end date has been passed. Is this by design or is this possible a bug? The idea would be that the customer Location shouldn’t be shown on the LoV after the end date has passed.Thanks

On the Purchase Order screen:Where can I find how TTL PO Cost (purchase_order.total_cost) is calculated? Under Goods and Services, how is Total Cost (purchase_gns.total_cost) calculated? Under Goods and Services, how is PO Cost (purchase_gns.po_cost) calculated?